Rheumatoid Arthritis: Kalden J

van der Heijde D, Kalden J, Scott D, Smolen J, Strand V. · Division of Internal Medicine, Department of Rheumatology, University Hospital Maastricht, 6202 AZ Maastricht, The Netherlands. · Ann Rheum Dis. · Pubmed #15140783 links to  free full text

Abstract: OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of long term (>2 years) leflunomide treatment on radiographic progression in patients with RA. METHODS: Patients treated with leflunomide for >2 years in one of three phase III trials and subsequent extensions, for whom paired, evaluable radiographs at baseline and study end point were available, were included. Radiographs of hands and feet were assessed according to the modified Sharp/van der Heijde scoring method, for erosion, joint space narrowing, and total score. Changes from baseline were assessed, and a predicted yearly progression rate estimated for each patient. RESULTS: 128 of the original 824 patients were included, with mean disease duration 5.1 years and mean leflunomide treatment duration 4.3 years until the final x ray examination. The mean change from baseline in total score was 8.6 with yearly adjusted rate 1.9, and the median change was 2 with yearly adjusted rate 0.5, compared with 7.9 and 4.9, respectively, before leflunomide treatment. After treatment, the rate improved in 92/128 (72%) patients and deteriorated in 21/128 (16%). In 42 (33%) patients who had a total score >0 at baseline, no radiographic progression occurred after leflunomide treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In a subset of patients who continued treatment long term, leflunomide treatment reduced the rate of radiographic damage.

Klareskog L, van der Heijde D, de Jager JP, Gough A, Kalden J, Malaise M, Martín Mola E, Pavelka K, Sany J, Settas L, Wajdula J, Pedersen R, Fatenejad S, Sanda M, Anonymous00113. · Rheumatology Unit, Department of Medicine, Karolinska Institute/Karolinska Hospital, Stockholm 17176, Sweden. · Lancet. · Pubmed #15001324 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Etanercept and methotrexate are effective in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis but no data exist on concurrent initiation or use of the combination compared with either drug alone. We aimed to assess combination treatment with etanercept and methotrexate versus the monotherapies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: In a double-blind, randomised, clinical efficacy, safety, and radiographic study, 686 patients with active rheumatoid arthritis were randomly allocated to treatment with etanercept 25 mg (subcutaneously twice a week), oral methotrexate (up to 20 mg every week), or the combination. Clinical response was assessed by criteria of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR). The primary efficacy endpoint was the numeric index of the ACR response (ACR-N) area under the curve (AUC) over the first 24 weeks. The primary radiographic endpoint was change from baseline to week 52 in total joint damage and was assessed with the modified Sharp score. Analysis was by intention to treat. FINDINGS: Four patients did not receive any drug; thus 682 were studied. ACR-N AUC at 24 weeks was greater for the combination group compared with etanercept alone and methotrexate alone (18.3%-years [95% CI 17.1-19.6] vs 14.7%-years [13.5-16.0], p<0.0001, and 12.2%-years [11.0-13.4], p<0.0001; respectively). The mean difference in ACR-N AUC between combination and methotrexate alone was 6.1 (95% CI 4.5-7.8, p<0.0001) and between etanercept and methotrexate was 2.5 (0.8-4.2, p=0.0034). The combination was more efficacious than methotrexate or etanercept alone in retardation of joint damage (mean total Sharp score -0.54 [95% CI -1.00 to -0.07] vs 2.80 [1.08 to 4.51], p<0.0001, and 0.52 [-0.10 to 1.15], p=0.0006; respectively). The mean difference in total Sharp score between combination and methotrexate alone was -3.34 (95% CI -4.86 to -1.81, p<0.0001) and between etanercept and methotrexate was -27 (-3.81 to -0.74, p=0.0469). The number of patients reporting infections or adverse events was similar in all groups. INTERPRETATION: The combination of etanercept and methotrexate was significantly better in reduction of disease activity, improvement of functional disability, and retardation of radiographic progression compared with methotrexate or etanercept alone. These findings bring us closer to achievement of remission and repair of structural damage in rheumatoid arthritis.

Maini R, St Clair EW, Breedveld F, Furst D, Kalden J, Weisman M, Smolen J, Emery P, Harriman G, Feldmann M, Lipsky P. · The Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology and The Imperial College School of Medicine at Charing Cross Hospital, London, UK. · Lancet. · Pubmed #10622295 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Not all patients with rheumatoid arthritis can tolerate or respond to methotrexate, a standard treatment for this disease. There is evidence that antitumour necrosis factor alpha (TNFalpha) is efficacious in relief of signs and symptoms. We therefore investigated whether infliximab, a chimeric human-mouse anti-TNFalpha monoclonal antibody would provide additional clinical benefit to patients who had active rheumatoid arthritis despite receiving methotrexate. METHODS: In an international double-blind placebo-controlled phase III clinical trial, 428 patients who had active rheumatoid arthritis, who had received continuous methotrexate for at least 3 months and at a stable dose for at least 4 weeks, were randomised to placebo (n=88) or one of four regimens of infliximab at weeks 0, 2, and 6. Additional infusions of the same dose were given every 4 or 8 weeks thereafter on a background of a stable dose of methotrexate (median 15 mg/week for > or =6 months, range 10-35 mg/wk). Patients were assessed every 4 weeks for 30 weeks. FINDINGS: At 30 weeks, the American College of Rheumatology (20) response criteria, representing a 20% improvement from baseline, were achieved in 53, 50, 58, and 52% of patients receiving 3 mg/kg every 4 or 8 weeks or 10 mg/kg every 4 or 8 weeks, respectively, compared with 20% of patients receiving placebo plus methotrexate (p<0.001 for each of the four infliximab regimens vs placebo). A 50% improvement was achieved in 29, 27, 26, and 31% of infliximab plus methotrexate in the same treatment groups, compared with 5% of patients on placebo plus methotrexate (p<0.001). Infliximab was well-tolerated; withdrawals for adverse events as well as the occurrence of serious adverse events or serious infections did not exceed those in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: During 30 weeks, treatment with infliximab plus methotrexate was more efficacious than methotrexate alone in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis not previously responding to methotrexate.